INTRODUCTION
Within the intricate passageways of India's legal system, where cases frequently linger for
years and obtaining justice continues to be extremely difficult, the idea of crowdsourced
justice holds great potential. Crowdsourcing, a phenomenon formerly linked to creativity and
group problem-solving in the digital era, is expanding beyond its traditional bounds to
investigate unexplored domains, including dispute resolution. The study of crowdsourced
justice becomes more than just an academic endeavor in the complex and multifaceted legal
context of India; it also becomes an engaging investigation into the democratization of the
justice-delivery process.
A growing caseload and the need for quicker justice highlight the need for alternative dispute
resolution (ADR) tools as we stand at the intersection of conventional legal standards and the
technology renaissance. ADR's new feature, crowdsourced justice, looms as a potential
game-changer. This essay aims to explore the characteristics of crowdsourced justice and
explore its potential within the distinctive socio-cultural fabric of India. Through this
investigation, we hope to gain a better understanding of crowdsourced justice's theoretical
foundations as well as its application in removing obstacles to the traditional legal system.
In the following sections, we will examine the advantages and difficulties of incorporating
public participation in dispute resolution; examine the legal and ethical issues specific to the
Indian context; and consider whether crowdsourced justice can be incorporated into the
current legal system.
HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE ON LEGAL DECISION-MAKING
Throughout history, the subject matter of who has the power to make legal decisions has
changed in response to advancements in technology and popular ideologies. For example, in
ancient Athens, trials were conducted by sizable groups of voluntarily selected individuals at
random, exemplifying a type of group decision-making ingrained in the social mores of the
day. Similar to this, merchant courts in the Middle Ages used peer judges following the ideas
of Lex Mercatoria, demonstrating a decentralized system in which parties involved in
commerce participated in the settlement of disputes.1
In the modern era, the landscape of legal decision-making has changed, giving judges and
professional attorneys greater authority. The community-centric methods of previous eras
were abandoned in favour of a centralised one. However, the 1990s saw the emergence of the
Internet, which signalled a significant shift in the dynamics of social cooperation and
economic systems around the world. Global connectedness made possible by the Internet
allowed crowds to cooperate online in previously unheard-of ways. This shift has important
ramifications for the process of making legal decisions. The idea of using crowdsourcing to
resolve disputes arises as we move through the digital era.
The Internet has spawned a virtual agora in the modern era, emulating the global participation
spirit of classical Athens. The capacity of virtual crowds to interact and cooperate across
1
Nikitas E. Hatzimihail, “The Many Lives-and Faces-of Lex Mercatoria: History as Genealogy in
International Business Law.” 2008 Law and Contemporary Problems, vol. 71, no. 3, pp. 169-190.
JSTOR, https://www.jstor.org/stable/27654670. Accessed 28 December 2023.
geographic borders allows for the inclusion of a variety of viewpoints and voices in the
process of making legal decisions. This interconnection, made possible by technology, gives
the age-old debate over who has the power to influence court decisions a vibrant new angle.
Crowdsourcing in the context of dispute resolution has its origins in the early years of online
dispute resolution (ODR) in the 1990s. Innovative businesses like iCourthouse were among
the first to test the idea of using collective intelligence to settle civil cases. This was the first
step into an area that would go on to change the face of established Alternative Dispute
Resolution (ADR) processes, such as arbitration and mediation.2 When eBay introduced a
crowdsourced panel for user complaints in the 2000s, it marked a crucial turning point in the
development of crowdsourced dispute resolution. This was different from traditional conflict
resolution techniques since users were involved in group decision-making through a digital
platform. eBay's foray into crowdsourcing in a business setting demonstrated the possibilities
of using the collective wisdom of the crowd to settle disputes, paving the way for further
advancements in the area.3
Crowdsourcing in dispute resolution develops as a dynamic synthesis in the convergence of
historical precedents and the digital era, redefining the parameters of legal decision-making.
From the agora that the Internet enabled to the ancient Athenian assemblies, the evolution
reveals a continuity where technology turns into a fourth party in the resolution of conflicts.
The interaction of communal intelligence and legal knowledge offers a nuanced way ahead as
we embrace this revolutionary potential, signalling a paradigm shift in how justice is not only
administered but also collaboratively formed. Crowdsourced conflict resolution is positioned
to shine as a lighthouse, shedding light on a cooperative vision for the future of legal
interaction in the furnace of tradition and innovation.
2
Federico Ast F& C at K and Bruno Deffains P at UP 2 PA, ‘When Online Dispute Resolution
Meets Blockchain: The Birth of Decentralized Justice’ (Stanford Journal of Blockchain Law &
Policy, 30 June 2021) <https://stanford-jblp.pubpub.org/pub/birth-of-decentralized-justice/
release/1> accessed 29 December 2023
3
Ibid
